Warringer Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 I leave for what, 3 fucking days, and now this thread is at FIFTEEN PAGES?HOLY HELL YOU GUYS ARE ACTIVE ;-; and fast too.Edit: Oh, my bad, i just got off of 4chan/wg/ Thought ' [5 ' looked like 15. Im going insane, 4chan and reddit are going to shit.You think that 15 pages of 15 entries in three days are fast?That'll only be about 75 posts per day.Okay, this is only a small forum, but over at Spacebattles we had threads that went up to 300 posts in a single day...Strangely enough those threads are either political or religious. :-\ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charzy Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 The N1 got into orbit pretty easily. Next up is making 3 of them, sticking them together and adding a massive payload Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
comradephil Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Another update coming today. New things include a space probe, decorative docking claw, and a payload assist module (PAM)The Claaaaaaaaaw! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charzy Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Earlier I calculated the efficiency of the Bertha series.® = last decimal is recurringEfficiency = (Thrust/Fuel consumption)*WeightLower is betterTwin Bertha Lite: 17.94 ®Medium Bertha: 20.416 ®Large Bertha: 24Omnipotent Bertha: 100Omnipotent Bertha is scarily inefficient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foamy Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Is there any chance of getting a 1m to 0.5m adapter of some sort? I've got a big desire to make some mini rockets even though the only engine suitable at the moment is the mini booster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andras Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Saturn 1 Block 1 as best I can at the momentNova, can you make a 1.75-2m decoupler/adapter that can hide engines?ETA- the detachable nose cones need to have a (-) negative sign before the ejection force number to make them eject forwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglasdtlltd Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 You think that 15 pages of 15 entries in three days are fast?That'll only be about 75 posts per day.Okay, this is only a small forum, but over at Spacebattles we had threads that went up to 300 posts in a single day...Strangely enough those threads are either political or religious. :-\No, i thought there was 15 pages on THIS post. I was confused sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dub_freak Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 My favourite parts pack, good work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molo Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 I'd be interested in something like the Aero Decoupler that's designed to be put on the bottom of a tank, with a mounting point that is partially beneath the tank. This would allow the creation of fairly accurate Atlas-type rockets! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andras Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 I'd be interested in something like the Aero Decoupler that's designed to be put on the bottom of a tank, with a mounting point that is partially beneath the tank. This would allow the creation of fairly accurate Atlas-type rockets! It looks much better when you do that with a bigger tank bodySunday's 2m tank w aero's and medium LFRs. Center motor is from the Saturn V parts pack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molo Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 Andras, yeah, I know. I mentioned it to NovaSilisko in irc, and showed a quick sketch of what I mean.Basically it's a 2m-3x1 adapter, but the outer two 1m engines are droppable. The M-50 is perfect for this as each engine weighs 3.2, while an empty 2m tank is something like 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rdfox Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 Saturn I is going to be a difficult nut to crack as long as the game engine remains as is; the crazy thing used a cluster of nine tanks to feed eight engines, and didn't even have the engines located in line with the tanks. Instead, you had a diamond-shaped cluster of four in the center, and then four more peripheral engines outboard of them, but rotated 45 degrees to the cluster.Really, the only way to do a realistic S-I or S-IB stage is to use the method that was used for the Saturn V parts, with one 'tank' part for the stage, and an 'engine' part that includes all eight engines and the thrust structure, until such time as we can have multiple top connections for a single part... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NovaSilisko Posted August 18, 2011 Author Share Posted August 18, 2011 Earlier I calculated the efficiency of the Bertha series.® = last decimal is recurringEfficiency = (Thrust/Fuel consumption)*WeightLower is betterTwin Bertha Lite: 17.94 ®Medium Bertha: 20.416 ®Large Bertha: 24Omnipotent Bertha: 100Omnipotent Bertha is scarily inefficient.There's something wrong with your math. If I decrease the fuel consumption to 20, the efficiency rating goes up to 300. And as you said, lower is better...Does not compoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NovaSilisko Posted August 18, 2011 Author Share Posted August 18, 2011 Pack has been updated!Download 1.2!Now with the last minute addition of these things: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 There's something wrong with your math. If I decrease the fuel consumption to 20, the efficiency rating goes up to 300. And as you said, lower is better...Does not compootThrust / Fuel Consumption = Fuel Efficiency.As such, higher is better.It's being multiplied by weight, by which LOWER is better.So, you get a broken ranking.Divide by weight instead and it should work as a fuel efficiency to weight ratio, IE higher being better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andras Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 Pack has been updated!Download 1.2!Now with the last minute addition of these things:http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/9461/ss20110817235438.jpgUmm, I think an ejection force of 150 is a little excessive on the N-1 decouplers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NovaSilisko Posted August 18, 2011 Author Share Posted August 18, 2011 Oops. they were supposed to be 15.I changed them in the 1.2 zip, nobody will ever have to know unless they read this post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadManiac Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 Thanks NovaSilisko!I'm, uhm... enjoying your parts a lot... :-[ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NovaSilisko Posted August 18, 2011 Author Share Posted August 18, 2011 When things like chance-based failures are added, I'm going to make the N1 engine more powerful, but have a high failure rate. (Not as bad as the real one, mind you...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molo Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 Thanks again for throwing together the Atlas-style offset fairings / decouplers. They're fun! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charzy Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 Thrust / Fuel Consumption = Fuel Efficiency.As such, higher is better.It's being multiplied by weight, by which LOWER is better.So, you get a broken ranking.Divide by weight instead and it should work as a fuel efficiency to weight ratio, IE higher being better.Oh. Derp then.Without weight, medium bertha is more efficient than twin Bertha lite Also, I don't understand the usage of the docking claw at all, can someone please explain? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NovaSilisko Posted August 18, 2011 Author Share Posted August 18, 2011 Oh. Derp then.Without weight, medium bertha is more efficient than twin Bertha lite Also, I don't understand the usage of the docking claw at all, can someone please explain?Right now it's pretty useless. But, it can be opened like a parachute, then jettisoned before reentry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andras Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 Nova, could you do an upside down 1.75m-2m adapter so one can mount 2m cargo sections over a 1.75m engine section? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NovaSilisko Posted August 18, 2011 Author Share Posted August 18, 2011 Nova, could you do an upside down 1.75m-2m adapter so one can mount 2m cargo sections over a 1.75m engine section?There already is one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andras Posted August 18, 2011 Share Posted August 18, 2011 I see it now, thanks! :-[ETA- What I was working on:Titan IIIE and Titan IV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts